Monday, April 17, 2006

I Don't Get It

As such I felt compelled to send them a letter pointing out their double standard.

On the episode of South Park titled 'Cartoon Wars part II', Comedy Central refused to show a picture of the Prophet Muhammad. I'm curious as to why your network decided to censor a picture of Muhammad but will allow the South Park creators to show a picture of "God" in which he looks like a type of rat creature and uses profanity or show Moses as a flashing disembodied head. Why the double standard? Is it okay simply to make fun of any other religion than Islam? You network is a joke in and of itself. I find your actions to be intolerable and I hope your viewership drops as a result.

I never cared much for your station to begin with.

Using my powers of foresight, I believe I will get either no response or a form letter explaining how 'each culture' has certain beliefs and we respect them all... blah, blah.

I never was much of a Comedy Central fan but now it's on my 'do not watch' list. Why are they protecting Islam? I know it's a private company and thus can censor at will, but this is blatantly anti-Christian, Jew, Catholic, etc. Anyone but Muslims. Are they afraid of a Fatwa? Well I hope they are afraid of a boycott too.

Update: I got a response. It's just what I figured it would be. Typical corporate apologist crap.

Dear Viewer, (Typical form letter opening)

Thank you for your correspondence regarding the "South Park" episodes entitled "Cartoon Wars." We appreciate your concerns (don't give a s***) about censorship and the destructive influence of outside groups on the media, entertainment industry and particularly Comedy Central.

To reiterate, as satirists, we believe that it is our First Amendment right to poke fun at any and all people, groups, organizations and religions (except Islam) and we will continue to defend that right. Our goal is to make people laugh and perhaps, if we're lucky, even make them think (I think you are idiots. Oooo, you made me think!) in the process.

Comedy Central's belief in the First Amendment has not wavered, despite our decision not to air an image of Muhammad. Our decision was made not to mute the voices of Trey and Matt or because we value one religion over any other (B.S.). This decision was based solely on concern for public safety in light of recent world events (cowering to terrorists).

With the power of freedom of speech and expression also comes the obligation to use that power in a responsible way. Much as we wish it weren't the case, times have changed and, as witnessed by the intense and deadly reaction to the publication of the Danish cartoons, decisions cannot be made in a vacuum (like your heads) without considering what impact they may have on innocent individuals around the globe.

It was with this in mind we decided not to air the image of Muhammad, a decision similar to that made by virtually every single media outlet across the country earlier this year when they each determined that it was not prudent or in the interest of safety to reproduce the controversial Danish cartoons. Injuries occurred and lives were lost in the riots set off by the original publication of these cartoons. The American media made a decision then, as we did now, not to put the safety and well being of the public at risk, here or abroad (Quick! Hide under the table or the bad men will get you!).

As a viewer of "South Park," you know that over the course of ten seasons and almost 150 episodes the series has addressed all types of sensitive, hot-button issues, religious and political, and has done so with Comedy Central's full support in every instance, including this one. "Cartoon Wars" contained a very important message (Family Guy sucks?), one that Trey and Matt felt strongly about, as did we at the network, which is why we gave them carte blanche in every facet but one: we would not broadcast a portrayal of Muhammad (Your God is better than ours).

In that regard, did we censor the show? Yes, we did. But if you hold Comedy Central's 15-year track record up against any other network out there, you'll find that we afford our talent the most creative freedom and provide a nurturing atmosphere that challenges them to be bold and daring and places them in a position to constantly break barriers and push the envelope. The result has been some of the most provocative television ever produced (Lousy comedians and dull shows).

We would like nothing more than to be able to look back at this in a few years and think that perhaps we overreacted. Unfortunately, to have made a different decision and to look back and see that we completely underestimated the damage that resulted was a risk we were not willing to take (And the terrorists rejoice at their victory).

Our pledge to you, our loyal viewers, is that Comedy Central will continue to produce and provide the best comedy available and we will continue to push it right to the edge, using and defending the First Amendment in the most responsible way we know how (NOW you use the 1st amendment responsibly?).

Sincerely,Comedy Central Viewer Services

Of course the stuff in parenthesis is mine. This is just the load of crap I expected. We have become a nation of cowards who let radical Islam stomp all over us. Even a network that I thought was above this has proven that those who terrorize, win.

Almost Time

I should have the new site soon. Just got an email from the people over at Fuitadnet.

Greetings,

We are really very sorry for the inconvenience caused and do apologize for the delay in responce too. Thank you for your patience and co-operation.

We are in process of create your bronze hosting package and domain registrationTheir is no issue with the transaction and we have also received the payment on your accountYou will have the access to the site and domain in few hours and we will update to you accordinglyKindly be with us for few hours.

Got a New Site

Steve the Pirate is going to help me set up the new Shoot a Liberal. The domain will be 'shootaliberal.com' and I hope to have it up and running soon. I'm so glad that I will finally be rid of this Blogger crap.

Even though they seem to have gotten their act straight with the child molesters, I think it will be good for me to get a site that is away from the garbage that Blogger allows.

I am extending an open invitation to all of the readers that have commented on this site to come check out the new one.

Yes that means trolls too. If it weren't for you guys, I wouldn't have as much fun blogging.

Thursday, April 13, 2006

Goodbye Blogger!

I guess the time has come to find a new home. Co-blogger and good friend Fmragtops has found out that Blogger is hosting a site dedicated to pedophilia.

The response he received from Blogger is pretty much the same "we only host it" crap that most of these big corporations tend to spew. Turn a blind eye just to make a lousy buck. (Except that hosting here is free... so I don't really get it.)

I'm joining the many others who are moving elsewhere. If you have a Blogger blog and care about the well-being of children, I recommend you to do the same.

Tuesday, April 11, 2006

My Thoughts on the Fairness Doctrine

Over the past few days, I've been hearing Sean Hannity mention the Fairness Doctrine.

As I work in broadcasting, you'd think I'd know what that is. Too bad that I didn't.

Anyway, I became a little curious and Wikipedia-ed "fairness doctrine" and to be quite honest, I was disgusted with what I read.

Now keep in mind that the Fairness Doctrine was implemented by a Republican. Or, as I like to refer to Nixon and others in his mold, a RINO (Republican In Name Only).

The Fairness Doctrine, according to Wiki, was designed to "balance" political opinion over public airwaves. In other words, it was a state-sponsored effort to chip away at the First Amendment.

The Doctrine was made up of two corollaries:

The personal attack rule is pertinent whenever a person or small group is subject to a character attack during a broadcast. Stations must notify such persons or groups within a week of the attack, send them transcripts of what was said, and offer the opportunity to respond on the air.

-and-

The political editorial rule applies when a station broadcasts editorials endorsing or opposing candidates for public office, and stipulates that the candidates not endorsed be notified and allowed a reasonable opportunity to respond.

Fortunately the Fairness Doctrine was done away with completely in 2000.

However, there have been-according to Hannity-many Democrats calling for the return of the Fairness Doctrine.

Why? I believe it would be a way to silence the talk radio righties, who are quickly becoming the most trusted source of news and political commentary for many Americans.

This would benefit the Democrats due to the key role talk radio and the "alternative media" played in the Election of 2004, which even those of you on the left cannot doubt.

Let's put it into perspective. Sean Hannity is syndicated on over five hundred radio stations nationwide. Stations make the decision to pick him up, thus the station would be responsible for enforcing the Fairness Doctrine to FCC specifications. That would mean that each of these five hundred stations would have to offer air time to the political figures that Sean Hannity bashes on a daily basis. This frustrates local radio bigwigs, thus the programs are taken off the air one by one. Boom. No more Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Neal Boortz, etc. The stations wouldn't be able to keep up with the paperwork, thus keeping the programs on air would no longer be financially beneficial to the station.

I want you to know that I think Al Franken and Michael Moore are two of the biggest morons that have ever walked the face of this earth. They're stupid, uneducated, and they're not as funny as they would think that they are. However, they have a God-given (that's right, I said the G-word) right to say what they think. Too many men and women have spilled their blood to allow them to spread their diatribe without interference from the Federal Government.

Do you love freedom? Say no to the Fairness Doctrine.

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."--Voltaire

You Wanna Know Why I Am For The GLOBAL War On Terror?

Well, let's see. How about because these terrorist @$$hats are freakin abominations that don't seserve the breath of life. They use up good people's oxygen and take up space that could be better used for landfills.

ASADABAD, Afghanistan - Students at a crowded school in eastern Afghanistan were studying outside when a rocket slammed into the schoolyard on Tuesday, killing six children and wounding 14 people.

Police blamed Taliban militants for the blast at the Salabagh School in Asadabad, alleging it was part of their campaign against government-sponsored education.

Why do I spew venom aimed at liberals, and hippies everywhere? One more cut and Paste:

But the school is close to a U.S.-led coalition base that has frequently come under attack.

Go figure. Apparently it is the US's fault these murderous bastards slaughtered innocent children at a SCHOOL. They shot TWO rockets at this school! They weren't aiming for the military base. You notice they don't disclose the exact distance the school is from the military base either. Cut and Paste:

In January, a school headmaster was beheaded in front of his family after refusing to close his school. In October, gunmen shot and killed another principal in front of his students.

In my opinion the writer of this story is a f-ing terrorist. How can you read something like this and not supprt the effort to route these punks-in-man-suits wherever they lay their heads, and by any means necessary? You complain about Gitmo? If it were up to me, any one of these turds that was captured and didn't have useful intel, they'd get Tarleton's Quarter.

This little blurb came to mind while surfing around the Zombietime site.

I read a little bit this morning about a prolife Walk for Life organized in San Fransisco about a month ago. As you can read here, left-wingers organized and begged the “people and workers of San Fransisco and the Bay Area to rise up and completely stop them in their tracks and completely stop their march.”

I know a thing or two about counterprotesting as I’m an active member of the right-wing counterprotest group Protest Warrior. However, there are some stark differences in the tactics the right use in comparison to the left.

As you can see, the leftists-at least those depicted on Zombietime and in their own forum-don’t believe in free speech. Right-wingers and religious people don’t have the right to organize and peacefully march in support of their own causes. This, my friends, is fascism at the core. The leftists in this case are using the same tactics they accuse the president of doing: denying the rights of someone to speak their mind regardless of who agrees with it.

We’re told from the top-down in Protest Warrior that our job is to accompany the march to present a different point of view. We are not allowed to disrupt, stop, or try and derail any event. We are simply there to show the leftists that they are not the moral majority, and we take a little pride in watching the reactions of the protestors when their moral house of cards is totally blown away by truth.

Here we see yet another stark difference between right and left: we believe in free speech, they believe in free speech as long as you stay in lock-step with their beliefs.

EDIT: Just in case you want to check out the ZT report, you can do so here.Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V, repeat...

Monday, April 10, 2006

Fan Mail

Hey Sean, I'm sorry about your troll problem. I'm not going to fill up you comment box with a post but I can email you this in response to the wackos.

I'll try to go point by point AG. The Federal Government , just like most privately owned business, pay a portion of insurance cost for their employees (they are usually given a choice of plans from different insurance companies and the price for the employee varies for the plans depending on the coverage they want). They don't give out free health care. What's more is that they use private insurance companies to administrate it because it is more cost effective than creating a department to deal with insurance claims and administration. Active military only use military healthcare establishments (unless deployed where there are none) and their dependants (also retirees) are on what is called Tri-Care, where they have co-pays, premiums, and monthly bills just like most of us. Soldiers themselves have free healthcare; this is true. I think you should think about the soldier being the product and not an employee of the government though. If a soldier isn't taken care of, their cost compared to productivity goes up and paying a sick soldier to be sick isn't helping anyone (although Army doctors are about useless unless you've been shot, but that's a whole other rant). Being an employee to government does have benefits but free health care is not one of them. So let's subtract the amount of federal employees out of the %60, I have better healthcare than they do and pay less for it.

Medicare is for older people and people with permanent disabilities. Medicare is an indemnity program where the recipient has a %20 co-pay for most procedures while the government picks up the other %80. It sounds like a good deal but in actuality %20 is a lot to pay when an appendectomy runs about $16,000. Along with their co-pays they pay a fee every month out of their social security to pay for Medicare. Every pay check, you also pay for their Medicare. It's interesting thing when right now in a few places you can get additional insurance to supplement your Medicare for next to, if not, nothing. You see, most insurance companies can take the little amount of money allotted for each person and administrate it to offer better coverage for Medicare recipients than Medicare can themselves. True there are more rules when you sign up for these supplement plans, but they reduce the %20 co-pay for things like operations down to a flat $100 co-pay. One particular company also had enough left over to offer a prescription plan before Medicare had the Part D. So how can a privately owned business offer better benefits to recipients for less money than the Government offers? Privately owned business are about the bottom line. They have to keep their customers and their stock holders happy. The Government does not care one way or the other. Bureaucracies have a tendency to only grow larger while only offering less. I personally would not trust the government to control my finances. Why would I trust them to control my health care?

Socialized health care leaves a lot to be desired. You don't believe me? Then why are there private doctors and hospitals in countries with socialized medicine? Competition breeds quality. Ask anyone that lives in a country with socialized medicine if they would rather go to the state provided doctor or a private doctor and they will tell you the same thing. They will take the private practice over a public one any day. Just like the difference between private schools and public schools, given a choice (and having the ability) people will always choose the better one. The best way to give everyone better care is to release the money from government bureaucracies and provide people with a choice about who will give them the best product.

I figure you will ask for proof and cite documents that provide evidence. I have no time for that nonsense, I've wasted enough time with this, but most of it is from personal experience. I've been a soldier, lived in a post communist country (Poland), lived in a country that is social programs running amuck (Germany), and worked for an insurance company that handles Medicare benefits. The truth is America provides opportunity for an individual to become what they want than any other country. Work ethic and the will to succeed is all it takes to make it in America. Other countries that offer all these social programs only punish people for succeeding by taking their money and giving it to people that haven't the desire, the will, or the work ethic to make their own success. When I left the service I contemplated living in Germany a while longer. I had a job lined up that paid %40 less than I'm making now, but due to Germany's tax structure I would pay twice the percentage of my income to taxes than I do now.

As far as your tiffs on this website with the administrators and writers. These are opinions and humor pieces. You said it correctly; you harass them. I haven't seen any intelligent arguments on your side either. A lot of things said here are meant to be tongue in cheek. Get over it and/or stop visiting. I've seen way more senseless comments on this sight since you and your team have been visiting. It really does deter me from commenting because I just don't like your prepubescent antics.

Sunday, April 09, 2006

Even They Know Why

Illegal immigration is not a new thing. Congress is debating whether or not to make it a felony to be in the U.S. without proper documentation. The R.J. has an article on the current deportation system. All of the deportees were brought over from local detention facilities. They say that illegals can stay in this country indefinately, under the current system, assuming that they can stay out of trouble with the law.

The problem comes in the form of higher rates at hospitals and the taxes that they don't pay. And they know it. Just ask Mexican national Gabriel Ruiz:

"A lot about it makes sense," he said. "The not paying taxes, the medical expenses. I understand why people wouldn't want us here, even though I was raised here."

They get it, so why don't those on the left? Would you want someone going into your house and stealing all of your valuables? Then why allow someone to steal from you in the form of misusing our public services?

I'd rather pay the salary of the guy who is there to send them home and enforce our nation's border. That's money well spent.

Some Random Thoughts

Just to break the monotony of the current tone of this blog I present a few random thoughts.

1) Lamar advertising recently put up a new billboard on the I-15 north just as you come into Vegas. It's essentially a big-screen television that they put ads on. Kinda cool idea. The only problem is for the people who live in the neighborhood that the sign faces. They get a bright light into the back yard of their homes now that wasn't there before. The funniest thing is, Lamar put up a billboard on the I-15 south advertising their new billboard. Just in case you miss that giant blinking thing that glares across the lanes of traffic.

2) I hate that community outreach radio that they put on Sunday mornings. I want to hear music, but on every channel it's either a medical program or some useless pseudo news program where someone drones on about a completely uninteresting subject over a bad phone connection. Wake me when it's over.

3) Bally's hotel has a new stage show called "Price is Right Live". No Bob Barker, but everyone is a contestant and prizes include trips and of course... "A New Car!". Sounds like a fun time and what other Vegas show gives you a chance to win prizes?

Okay, back to bashing on me and my co-bloggers. Pardon the interruption.